Answer:
no ones going to answer that i'm just stating facts
Explanation:
Although a description of the case was not provided for this question, we can confirm that as a member of the jury, when deciding guilt, you should hold the prosecution to the burden of proof.
<h3>What we know about the burden of proof.</h3>
- In any criminal case, the prosecution carries the burden of proof.
- The prosecution must prove the guilt of the defendant beyond a reasonable doubt.
- When acting as a member of the jury, you should hold your decision to this standard.
- You should only vote guilty if there are no logical doubts present as to the arguments presented by the prosecution.
Therefore, we can confirm that when acting as a jury member, you should base your decision on the prosecution's ability to prove guilt beyond any reasonable doubt.
To learn more about criminal law visit:
brainly.com/question/1869780?referrer=searchResults
Answer:
I would vote for the nominee.
Explanation:
The Supreme Court has jurisdiction all over the nation, just because one state doesn't like their choices doesn't mean they aren't a great nominee. As stated in the question they have an excellent reputation as a lawyer, and as a lower court judge. So yes I would vote for the nominee.
